In today's posting on occlusional and inclusional logic Alan's last sentence
focused on:
"...the vulnerable and impermanent influence of the 'dynamic locality of
self' as a vital inclusion of natural energy flow everywhere."
In a conversation this Thursday morning, with the Inclusion Team of Bath and
North East Somerset (a local authority in the UK), I'll bring this idea into
the conversation to see if it is possible and desirable to share this idea
in a way that could help to distinguish explanatory principles of
educational influence and educational standards of judgment.
If anyone has anything that could help me to show "...the vulnerable and
impermanent influence of the 'dynamic locality of self' as a vital inclusion
of natural energy flow everywhere." in an explanatory principle of
educational influence do please send it on a.s.a.p.
Love Jack
On 16 Jun 2009, at 10:23, Alan Rayner (BU) wrote:
Dear All,
At last night's educational conversation with Jack, the discussion focussed
around Jack trying to draw out my meaning in describing 'space' as the
'prime' or 'unmoved mover' of Nature, a vital receptive presence without
which no energetic form or flow would be possible.
In the process, the word 'occlusion' emerged as possibly more apt than
'exclusion' as a way of describing the implication of the definitive logic
of objective rationality and contrasting this with the fluid logic of
transfigural inclusionality. To 'occlude' literally means to block out or
block in the continuity of receptive (non-resistive) space that makes flow
possible. To 'occlude completely' is the basis for absolute definition, the
imposition of discontinuity between 'form' and 'space' as 'material' and
'immaterial' that is embedded in the foundations of objectivist logic and
orthodox mathematics. But it is actually impossible to accomplish without
partially or wholly freezing the dynamics of the cosmos in a fixed frame or
dimensionless point for eternity.
What emerged from this is that according to 'the definitive logic of spatial
occlusion', upon which objective rationality is founded, things can only
move or be moved by means of the imposition of local force (i.e. by action
and reaction), whereas according to 'the fluid logic of spatial inclusion',
upon which transfigural inclusionality is founded, movement arises from the
local response of 'form' to receptive influence everywhere (i.e. via
reception, reflection and response). Hence, when we move from the logic of
spatial occlusion to the logic of spatial inclusion, we move from the
rationalistic paradigm of stasis (stuckness) to the inclusional paradigm of
flow as a dynamic local configuration of non-local space.
We went on to talk about what this paradigmatic transformation might imply
for a 'Soulful Spirituality', which cares BOTH for the 'local dynamic
neighbourhood of self' AND 'the non-local omnipresence of receptive space
everywhere' as vital inclusions of one another in the manifestation of
universal gravitational (soul-full) and levitational (spirit-full) identity
as flow-form. We discussed the dangers and potential abuses of regarding
these rationalistically in one way or the other in terms of mutually
exclusive and 'Master-Slave' relationships. We also discussed the
difficulties and dangers of language - especially the need to avoid
'off-putting' religious and technical-sounding terms - in introducing this
understanding to a wider community. What other words could convey the
meaning of 'soulful', 'spiritual', 'gravitational', 'levitational', 'inner
infinity', 'outer infinity' etc? 'Passion', 'Empathy' and Roy's 'the love
(receptive influence) within' and 'the love without' came to mind. It became
very clear that none of these is possible without acknowledgement of the
vulnerable and impermanent influence of the 'dynamic locality of self' as a
vital inclusion of natural energy flow everywhere.
Warmest
Alan
|